Archive for the ‘People’s Republic of China’ Category

At video on HotAir, Geithner is asked if we should get rid of the debt ceiling.

Interviewer: Do you agree with Alan Greenspan that we ought to just eliminate the debt ceiling?

Geithner: Oh absolutely.

Tim Geithner can’t pay his own taxes, so there’s zero reason he should’ve been Treasury Secretary to begin with, but that’s just another in the long string of Obama appointments that are glossed over entirely by the media.  Just a reminder, though.

ZeroHedge asks what Geithner will do now, as it seems he’s leaving the Obama administration, and briefly recaps his past, which also ties in with his statement above:

Tim Geithner’s public “servant” tenure has not been without its blemishes: from his deplorable run as the (figure)head of the New York Fed (from 2003 until 2009), when the entire financial system literally imploded under his watch, to his epic failing up as Hank Paulson’s replacement as treasury Secretary of the United States, despite his legendary inability to navigate the Minotaurian labyrinth that is the TurboTax income tax flowchart, the Dartmouth alum has had his share of run ins with adversity (and adversity won). Of course, Geithner’s tenure in charge of the Treasury in the past 4 years has been somewhat mollified by the fact that here too here was merely a figurehead, and the true entity that runs the US printing presses is none other than the JPM and Goldman Sachs co-chaired Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee (for more on the TBAC read here and especially here as pertains to the former LTCM trader and current head of JPM’s CIO group), meaning that the US Treasury, just like the Fed, are merely branches of the one true power in US governance: Wall Street. Geithnerian figureheadedness aside, the one undeniable fact is that Tim Geithner’s days as head of the Treasury are now numbered: he has made it quite clear that he will not accompany Obama (should the incumbent be reelected) into his second term. So what is a career “public servant” to do once the public no longer has any interest in retaining his services? Bloomberg’s Deborah Solomon has some suggestions…

First, it may come as a surprise to some, that just like virtually every other central planner currently in charge of deciding the fate of billions of people in US and around the world, Geithner has never really had much interaction with real life:

Despite the fact that much of the public — not to mention some lawmakers on Capitol Hill — assume Geithner worked on Wall Street, he never has. Instead, he has spent most of his career in public service. Before taking the Treasury post in 2009, Geithner headed the Federal Reserve Bank of New York for six years and worked at the International Monetary Fund. His main private-sector job was at Kissinger Associates Inc.

 The years in public service — particularly engaging in diplomacy with domestic and foreign partners — left a deep impression on Geithner, infusing him with a sense of purpose that he might find lacking on Wall Street (see: “Why I Left Goldman Sachs” by Greg Smith).

This by itself isn’t to much of a surprise, but consider what the debt ceiling is.  It’s an artificial limit set by congress that says “we’re not spending money we don’t have past this mark”.  It’s a way (though not a great way) to somewhat reign in spending by government.

Tim Geithner, who can’t figure out how to pay his own taxes, has been a Treasury Secretary who’s functionally done nothing but print more money.  His plan to deal with the economy and government debt has been Quantitative Easing 1, 2, and now Ad Infinitum.  Of course he’d want to eliminate the debt ceiling.  Then the government can just spend spend spend into oblivion without even a hint of restraint.  Besides, Geithner is part of the powerful elite ruling class, and he won’t be living a life impacted by his own decisions, whether he leaves as Treasury Secretary or stays on.

Remember this condemnation from the Chicoms, from last year?

SHANGHAI — China, the largest foreign holder of United States debt, said Saturday that Washington needed to “cure its addiction to debts” and “live within its means,” just hours after the rating agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded America’s long-term debt.

“The U.S. government has to come to terms with the painful fact that the good old days when it could just borrow its way out of messes of its own making are finally gone,” read the commentary, which was published in Chinese newspapers.

When the govt. is printing bonds and TIPS and everything else to sell to the Federal Reserve and all the mess that is Quantitative Easing, and especially if the debt ceiling is removed, at best, all this becomes is a longer game of kicking the can down the road, assuming someone wants to solve the problem.

The downright scary part is what FerFal wrote about in Argentina:

As for the rest of the population, nothing has ever worked as well for the peronist party as keeping those families poor and numerous, and the Ks repeat that same recipe. The handouts for one reason or another make sure those votes keep coming. Handouts per child, for political support, its all there if you show up to the rallies or protest against the companies that aren’t “team players” with the government.  If you are a company owner, in the legal or illegal pharmaceutical business, a good amount of donations will go a long way in ensuring the health of your business. We’re (sic) does the money come from? Stealing the retirement funds helped, so does sucking the blood out of what’s left of the middle class through taxes…

What if they really don’t want to solve the problem?  What if they just want to destroy everything?  Fundamental transformation?  The super-rich Democrats have for the last few decades managed to paint themselves as a party that cares about the poor through giving handouts, and they’ve done well politically with it.  There are entire regions in cities that vote exclusively for Democrats, and mostly because they’re areas that are clearly politically defined as handout-recipients and usually along ethnic lines.  Thomas Sowell has written extensively on how the Democrat party has abused the urban black community into poverty and squalor and convinced them that the Democrats will save them, a disturbing mass Munchausen by proxy.  Democrats by their Alinsky playbook mean to go out, create a crisis, and “solve” it; they never let a good crisis go to waste, and instituting a crisis in order to further their own political goals is something that has been done many times before.

And while there are some in the party who do want that, there are others, like Geithner, who are probably just ignoramuses, or insulated “geniuses” convinced of their own superior intellect who don’t understand that spending money you don’t have doesn’t work forever.  Isolating purely the economic side of it and ignoring the political power grabs that are coming from it, you simply cannot kick the can down the road forever.

Apparently there’s a nice term for when this ends, now.  A Keynesian Endpoint.

Keynesian endpoint is a phrase coined by PIMCO’s Anthony Crescenzi in an email note to clients in June 2010 to describe the point where governments can no longer stimulate and rescue their economies through increased government spending due to endemic levels of pre-existing government debt.

“Time, devaluations, and debt restructurings might be the only way out for many nations,” Crescenzi wrote in an e-mailed note titled “Keynesian Endpoint” that referenced the Great Depression era economist John Maynard Keynes. Debt-fueled spending programs aimed at combating the global financial crisis of 2008 are among policy tools now “being seen as a magic elixir that has morphed into poison.”

Margaret Thatcher summed it up well years ago:

Of course, while the financial system may fail on this, there are a lot of scapegoats to go kill and enemies to destroy, and a lot more people to blame.  The Democrats are already gearing up to blame the Republicans for the fiscal cliff – it benefits them to go over the cliff and hurt the country so they can blame Republicans.

>Here is a good reason why Americans need to question everything about their federal government. The following are a collection of Reverend Wright’s comments from a speech he gave at the Monthly Review. Here we go:

“This magazine unflinchingly has tackled the tough issues from McCarthyism to militarism, from the Chinese revolution through the Canadian revolution to the Cuban revolution, from the lies told by United States presidents to the lies told by the United States media. We celebrate tonight six decades of dedicated service.”

The Monthly Review is a socialist magazine here’s the link.

Wait there’s more:

“You stayed up front. Your starting point is, quote, no nonsense Marxism, unquote. But you dispel all the negative images we have been programmed to conjure up with just the mention of that word “Socialism” or “Marxism.”

Great, so we have a news publication that pushes Marxism, I have no problem with free speech but we need to remember who this guy preached to for 20 years. If you need a reminder Rev. Wright was the Obama family for around 20 years.

More Rev. Wright:

“Grateful for the opportunity to bring you a word of Thanksgiving from those who don’t ordinarily get a hearing unless they go along with the program, sing in tune with whatever is the popular tune and stay in lockstep with the political pundits who tell us what is politically correct, what is permissible and what will be tolerated from a person of color in this land, the land of the greed and the home of the brave excuse me, the land of the greed and home of the slave.”

If he feels this way he’s free to leave the country. I certainly won’t keep him here if he hates America so much. America has always been about making your own mark and doing whatever it is that makes you happy. We have the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Unfortunately, the pursuit of happiness doesn’t always result in happiness and I, for one, can attest to the fact.

More from the Reverend:

“For the people. My work with liberation theology, with Latin American theologians, with the Black Theology Project and what the Cuban Council of Churches taught me 30 years ago the importance of Marx and the Marxist analysis of the sociology’s of the vulnerable and the oppressed who were trying desperately to break free of the political economies undergirded by this country that were choking them and cutting off any hope of a possible future where all of the people would benefit. My exposure to the FMLN in El Salvador, the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and my presence at the 15th Jamahiriya in Libya taught me what I have read in the pages of the Monthly Review which is as Joshua Stanton says, though we need not always agree with one another, we must do the work necessary to at least understand one another.

Only in America can we not always agree with each other yet still have the freedom to do so. Try making your ideas known in Communist China, or in Cuba and see where it gets you. Most likely in prison or shot I would think. All those places Rev. Wright mentions try making your opinion known there. I would also like to see him show me a model of a Marxist Utopia. It doesn’t exist nor can it exist. Marxism is about control, it suppresses free thinking, the economy, and religion.

A utopia is funded upon the idea that every person can be the same. When I say same I mean have the same interest, the same aptitude, the same emotional response, the same belief, the and same religion. A common sense, rational person can tell you this can never be. People are different. We all have different interest, beliefs, emotional responses, mental aptitudes and different religions. The Founding Fathers knew this to be the case. That is why they made America to be a land of opportunity. It might not be possible for us all to be a Bill Gates, however, that one Bill Gates gives the American economy thousands of jobs and provides unlimited services to the American population as a whole.

The fact is Reverend Wright doesn’t espouse the views of the Founding Father’s. He wants to handcuff the many so that the needs of the few are met. His policies are designed to destroy this country’s greatness and turn us all into wards of the all powerful state. A member of his congregation for 20 years now sits in the Oval Office as President of the United States. Through our Czar Wars articles you have seen first hand what type of people our president has surrounded himself with in his administration. Now you have had a more in depth look at a man who helped shaped the views of President Barrack Hussein Obama.

What will you do now America. Today votes are being cast across the nation. Whose side are you on? The Founding Fathers or on the side of the totalitarian progressives?